Tuesday, 22 February 2011

Today's Non-Story

During an interview with the Radio Times, the former MP, Jacqui Smith, remarked:

"I know that it was my expenses people looked at first because I was a woman and should have been at home looking after my husband and children," said the mother of two.

She said that she felt 'protective' towards her husband because of the contribution he made to their family - which she was unable to do due to her heavy work schedule.

"I couldn't have done the job without Richard to pick the boys up when they were sick, make them do their homework and piano practice,"

Ms Smith just doesn't get it does she? Her expenses were examined because she designated her family home as her 'second home' and her 'main home' as a London property she shared with her sister. It was nothing whatsoever to do with being a woman - it was to do with defrauding the taxpayer.

However, she is a woman who believes in her abilities (I'm being polite) and can be heard presenting a documentary about pornography for Radio 5 Live next Thursday, which she hopes may lead to further opportunities as a broadcaster. I'm sure she recognises the irony as she enjoys the financial benefits of her latest project with the BBC.

Nauseating that Ms Smith pays tribute to her spouse for looking after the children, for which he was paid £40k per annum out of the public purse as her 'personal assistant'.

It may sound perverse to say this, but I am kind of relieved that the expenses scandal shows no sign of going away.Having rejected the defence "It was all within the rules", people now aren't buying the line of "Move on, nothing to see here" or "It's all been sorted". Far less, the sob story "The new IPSA system is causing real hardship to MPs".It is only in the last few weeks that reality has started to set in. The first culprits are being sent to prison, and on the evidence of their published claims, at least another 50 should follow them.

In terms of the most ludicrous claims (duck house, moat cleaning, porn films), I think the venerable Tam Dalyell takes the biscuit.He claimed £8000 for bookcases in his 'second' home (The Binns, ancestral home of the Dalyells for centuries).8k for bookcases? Ah well it's a listed property, B&Q won't do.Why do you need them? To house my extensive collection of Hansards.Why can't you keep them in your office in Westminster? Ah well, I'm resigning from parliament in a couple of months.So how are these needed for the exercise of your duties as an MP?[Answer came there none.]

Correction.Having relied on memory, I have now checked with the Telegraph site.Mr Dalyell did not designate The Binns as his second home. Apologies.

But he did designate part of The Binns as his constitutency office, for which he claimed multiple costs. Also the amount claimed for bookcases was not £8000 as I suggested, but £18000, reduced by the fees office to £7800.I think my point stands.

Also, I wonder who paid for all those Hansards and why he did not leave them behind for the benefit of his successor.